New map by Jason Lutes

[Jasper]

That's what I figured. It's the same source I have for my belief...

In retrospect it seems like you're more likely to be right, as with 40% sites it always seems like most provinces have sites. Then again, it seems like more than 13% of provinces have no sites...

[Truper]

Originally posted by Jasper:
That's what I figured. It's the same source I have for my belief...

In retrospect it seems like you're more likely to be right, as with 40% sites it always seems like most provinces have sites. Then again, it seems like more than 13% of provinces have no sites...

I've always suspected, with no real basis other than the logic *I* would have gone by, that the increased chance of sites in mountain, etc. is counterbalanced by a reduced chance in farmlands. So that with 40% sites both most provinces having sites and more than 13% of provinces having none are both reasonable.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Jasper:
That's what I figured. It's the same source I have for my belief...

In retrospect it seems like you're more likely to be right, as with 40% sites it always seems like most provinces have sites. Then again, it seems like more than 13% of provinces have no sites...

Make a search for "magic sites" on this forum, and look for the the thread with the same name that I've started myself few days ago. KristofferO explained there clearly how magic sites placement algorithm work in their code. The placements in each potential site "slot" have the same chance (basic province chance +- terrain midifier) and are independent of each other.

[Stormbinder]

Originally posted by Truper:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jasper:
That's what I figured. It's the same source I have for my belief...

In retrospect it seems like you're more likely to be right, as with 40% sites it always seems like most provinces have sites. Then again, it seems like more than 13% of provinces have no sites...

I've always suspected, with no real basis other than the logic *I* would have gone by, that the increased chance of sites in mountain, etc. is counterbalanced by a reduced chance in farmlands. So that with 40% sites both most provinces having sites and more than 13% of provinces having none are both reasonable.

---

Yeap, it is true. In fact only for farmlands (asuming farmland modifier is -20% and the site frequence is 40%) the chance that the standard farmland province has zero magic sites is 0.8*0.8*0.8*0.8 = 0,4096. (The probability formula is (100% - (40%-20%))^4 ) )

That means that in average 40% of all farmland provinces with such settings have zero magic sites.

[tinkthank]

Jason, could I ask a question?

I *love* both of these maps.
Do you think it would be possible to have the tga *larger*? The provinces are often so small that the little icons (I like the candles, money, temples all on) dont fit in the provinces. What if the .tga file were just a bit larger? (Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I know nothing about mapmaking)
Does that make sense?

thanks much for listening

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by Jasper:
That's what I figured. It's the same source I have for my belief...

In retrospect it seems like you're more likely to be right, as with 40% sites it always seems like most provinces have sites. Then again, it seems like more than 13% of provinces have no sites...

In Dominions I we believed that it was as Jasper said (it might even have been true once). Many Dominions I players might have the same impression as Jasper. Now it works as Stormbinder says: each of the site slots have a chance of getting a site independent on the other sites.

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by tinkthank:
Jason, could I ask a question?

I *love* both of these maps.
Do you think it would be possible to have the tga *larger*? The provinces are often so small that the little icons (I like the candles, money, temples all on) dont fit in the provinces. What if the .tga file were just a bit larger? (Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I know nothing about mapmaking)
Does that make sense?

thanks much for listening

You can change the #defaultmapzoom in the map file. It alters the size of the icons vs the map tga.